A large plurality of senators and representatives, not only at the federal level but within each state, and thousands of mayors, aldermen, attorneys general and other officeholders spent the last year or two trying to get re-elected, or elected to a higher office than that they currently held. Thousands of folks employed already in other government jobs and not facing an election, spent much of their time actively campaigning for the folks that were running for their political lives. And every minute these folks were jobseekers, they were not doing the jobs for which we pay them.
Let's try to put this into a framework with which we can more easily relate: I work at a busy publishing company. If one-third of the people in our company spent, say, 25 (this is a conservative figure, trust me, politicians on the campaign trail aren't this responsible) of their 40 hours each week this year looking for another job, what might happen? I can tell you that the work would not get done, deadlines would not be met, magazines would not be printed and mailed and advertisers (the folks that provide our income) would cancel contracts and our company, which is still profitable despite the current economic times, would go deeply in debt and reach insolvency within the year.
Ah, but Mike, you say, knowing where I'm going with this, it's not exactly the same in government. Each of the senators and representatives and most of the other public servants [I assume you use that term loosely] employ staff to do the actual work. You then remind me that the work does, indeed, get done, and that these elected folks try, at least, to show up for votes.
Yes, yes, Right you are. Point taken. So let me rephrase the question: What if, then, one third of the folks I work with (or you work with) employed just one other person (part-time, mind you) to perform the the work they don't get done during the 25 hours they are looking for a better job? Well, of course, the work would get done, after a fashion, but the company payroll would skyrocket and we'd still end up insolvent. It would just take a little longer. And that's my point: Looking for work when you're supposed to be working ... doesn't work.
It just so happens that the federal government and many of the state governments have this problem, they're insolvent. While their problems paying the bills can't be blamed entirely on the fact that large numbers of elected officials and their friends haven't actually been earning their keep lately, I suspect that the following proposal might help take the edge off of what economists are predicting will be a more than $1 trillion federal national debt for 2009, and an incalculable additional pile of money for all the state and local deficits. How about we pass a law that says all elected and appointed government officials will spend the entirety of the time between 7:30 in the morning and 5:00 in the evening, Monday through Friday, actually doing their jobs? All campaigning, speech writing, fund raising, stumping, etc. (for themselves or for others) must be done only after hours or on weekends.
That's it? you ask.
Yep, I say.
Well, gee, Mike, that sounds like an interesting idea — certainly nobody's going to have a problems with putting elected officials back to work, but ... how does that solve our money problems? you ask. Well, you got me there. They might be able to let go a staffer or two. But, that and eliminating "earmarks" wouldn't even put a dent in the debt, even in good economic times.
You're right again. But let's come at this a different way. What might happen if campaigning pols and their pals all went back to governing? First off, they'd actually get things done. For example, instead of being caught flatfooted by the current credit crisis, government officials might actually have seen it coming and, well, done something about it, rather than "suspending their campaigns for the good of the country" and rushing back to the Capitol to deal with it after its become an unmanageable crisis. They might also have noticed that something was seriously wrong with the mortgage industry. They might have outlawed subprime mortgages (anybody with a calculator, a brain and a conscience could have foreseen, long-term, that that idea was a loser). They might have stopped to wondered why the Bernard Madoffs of the world manage to make 10 percent for their clients, year in and year out, when everyone else can't. They could have looked into investment banking and asked what the hell those new types of "no lose" securities everyone was so excited over were all about. They could have inquired into why the SEC and other regulators weren't doing their jobs. They might have passed laws that ensured that loans were made ethically and that low-income people were not lured by their own greed and the avarice of others into long-term adjustable-rate mortgages that claimed half their gross income. Those folks, unencumbered by ballooning debt, could have saved some of that money, giving banks the large pool of ready cash they need to make loans to businesses for responsible, sensible investments in new equipment, research and development on new technologies like clean, renewable energy and electric cars, and creating new jobs. Slowly, those growing businesses would get healthier and with them the economy would grow. Health care programs would improve as businesses competed for talent to realize their bolder technology mandates.
Sooner or later, not all, but many of the folks who otherwise would have desperately gambled on homes they couldn't afford might eventually get one that they could pay for. These happy people would be better able to afford to pay their taxes, and wouldn't be quite as susceptible to electing any fool who promised a tax cut. The national debt would decline. People could afford the new electric cars. Not distracted every minute by the effort to make ends meet every two weeks, Main Street folks might get interested in things like improving schools, building better transit systems, repairing dangerous bridges, curing AIDS, serving their country and saving the planet. These more prosperous people would have little need to find an ethnic group to blame their troubles on. America would become a more welcoming place again ("Give me your tired your poor, your huddled masses ...."). The world might once again marvel at and envy the American Dream. They might want to imitate it. They might ask for help doing it. Terrorists might then have little success riling people up about the Great Satan. Peace might break out.
It could happen.
No comments:
Post a Comment